Answer:

In this scenario, a conflict has emerged between the Chief Architect, deeply committed to a critical project, and Seema, a talented architect with innovative ideas. This demands a thoughtful approach to navigate the ethical dilemmas at hand and find a balance that preserves Seema’s contributions while ensuring the project’s success.

Stakeholders Involved and Their Interests:

• Seema: Her interest lies in contributing effectively to the project, gaining recognition for her ideas, and working in a respectful and supportive environment.
• Chief Architect: He is concerned about his reputation and wishes to ensure that his contributions to the project are acknowledged.
• Me (As Additional Director General): I am interested in successfully completing the project, retaining valuable talent like Seema, and maintaining a harmonious work environment.
• The Organization: The organization’s interest is in achieving project success, fostering a culture of respect and inclusivity, and preventing workplace issues that can affect productivity and employee retention.
• Society at Large: Society benefits from efficient and ethical public works projects, making it crucial to address workplace issues that may impact project outcomes.

Ethical Issues Involved:

• Workplace Harassment: The Chief Architect’s aggressive and disrespectful behavior towards Seema, including humiliation and constant public correction, raises the issue of workplace harassment.
• Unfair Competition: The Chief Architect’s insecurity and fear indicate a reluctance to recognize and appreciate the contributions of others. This unfair competition undermines the principles of collaboration and teamwork.
• Gender Equality: The Chief Architect’s differential treatment of Seema, possibly influenced by gender bias, raises ethical concerns about gender discrimination in the workplace.
• Suppression of Meritocracy: The Chief Architect’s efforts to impede Seema’s career development undermine the principles of meritocracy and fairness.
• Abuse of Power: The Chief Architect’s use of his senior position to belittle Seema reflects the concern of abuse of power, fostering a hostile work environment.
• Failure to Uphold Organizational Values: The Chief Architect’s behavior is inconsistent with the values of professionalism, respect, and collaboration that an organization like the Central Public Works Department should uphold.

Options Available:

Option-1. Mediation and Conflict Resolution: Initiate mediation between Seema and the Chief Architect to address their issues and foster a conducive work environment.

Pros:

• Promotes open communication and understanding between Seema and the Chief Architect.
• Has the potential to resolve the conflict amicably, leading to a more harmonious work environment.
• Provides a structured process for addressing grievances and finding mutually agreeable solutions.

Cons:

• Success depends on the willingness of both parties to participate in mediation, which may not be guaranteed.
• Mediation can be time-consuming, potentially affecting project timelines.
• If confidentiality is breached during or after mediation, it can lead to further issues and distrust in the workplace.

Option-2.Training and Sensitization: Conduct workshops and training sessions on workplace ethics, respectful communication, and conflict resolution to create a harmonious work atmosphere.

Pros:

• Enhances the overall workplace culture by promoting respect and inclusivity.
• Provides a proactive approach to prevent future conflicts and incidents of harassment.
• Sends a strong message about the organization’s commitment to ethical conduct.

Cons:

• It may take time to see the desired cultural changes.
• Some employees may resist or not fully engage in the training.
• Training alone may not resolve the existing conflict between Seema and the Chief Architect.

Option-3.Reassign Roles: Contemplating a reshuffling of roles could potentially defuse the tension while preserving the project’s integrity.

Pros:

• Provides a short-term solution to reduce conflict and tension in the project.
• Allows Seema to work without the constant harassment from the Chief Architect.
• Preserves the project’s integrity and Seema’s contributions.

Cons:

• May not address the root cause of the Chief Architect’s insecurity and aggressive behavior.
• Could be seen as avoiding the issue rather than confronting it directly.
• May require a reshuffling of responsibilities that could impact other team members or projects.

My Response to Seema’s Predicament:

• Personal Counselling and Supportive Guidance: I’d offer Seema personal counseling, creating a safe space for her to openly address her concerns and providing guidance on handling the challenging situation with the Chief Architect.
• Creation of Safe and Inclusive Workplace: I’d reassure Seema that her contributions are highly valued, and she will receive fair and respectful treatment, fostering an environment conducive to her professional growth.
• Confidential Reporting Mechanism: I’d establish a confidential reporting system for Seema, ensuring her protection and prompt attention to her concerns.

Preventive Measures:

Following measures can help prevent such occurrences from happening in the future:

• Anti-Harassment Policies: Implement stringent policies aimed at curbing harassment and cultivating a workplace culture rooted in respect and inclusivity. The Norwegian Working Environment Act serves as an inspiration.
• Recognition of Merit: Promote a culture that celebrates meritocracy, valuing innovative contributions from individuals at all levels within the organization, akin to the “Performance-Based Incentive Scheme” implemented in some organizations.
• Mentorship Program: Establish a mentorship initiative that encourages the exchange of knowledge and experience between senior and junior employees, fostering mutual respect and professional growth.
• Regular Feedback Mechanisms: Institute routine feedback mechanisms, similar to the “360-Degree Feedback” process to maintain a healthy working environment, enabling the timely identification and resolution of issues before they escalate.

Conclusion

This case underscores the importance of upholding workplace values, necessitating a multi-pronged approach to effectively address Seema’s situation. By fostering a culture of respect and inclusivity, the team can be guided towards achieving successful project completion while maintaining a harmonious work atmosphere.

DOWNLOAD PDF